Apple is reportedly planning to launch AI-powered glasses, a pendant, and AirPods

[highplainsdem]

Source: The Verge

Apple is reportedly aiming to start production of its smart glasses in December, ahead of a 2027 launch. The new device will compete directly with Meta’s lineup of smart glasses and is rumored to feature speakers, microphones, and a high-resolution camera for taking photos and videos, in addition to another lens designed to enable AI-powered features.

The glasses won’t have a built-in display, but they will allow users to make phone calls, interact with Siri, play music, and “take actions based on surroundings,” such as asking about the ingredients in a meal, according to Bloomberg. Apple’s smart glasses could also help users identify what they’re seeing, reference landmarks when offering directions, and remind wearers to complete a task in specific situations, Bloomberg reports.

-snip-

Apple’s plans for AI hardware don’t end there, as the company is expected to build upon its Google Gemini-powered Siri upgrade with an AirTag-sized AI pendant that people can either wear as a necklace or a pin. This device would “essentially serve as an always-on camera” for the iPhone and has a microphone for prompting Siri, Bloomberg reports. The pendant, which The Information first reported on last month, is rumored to come with a built-in chip, but will mainly rely on the iPhone’s processing power. The device could arrive as early as next year, according to Bloomberg.

Apple could also launch upgraded AirPods this year, which Gurman previously said could pair low-resolution cameras with AI to analyze a wearer’s surroundings.

Read more: https://www.theverge.com/tech/880293/apple-ai-hardware-smart-glasses-pin-airpods

---

The Trump regime must love the AI bros' quest to create a society where everyone has themselves and everyone around them under surveillance at all times.

They just need lots of data centers to handle the non-stop data gathering by all the dumb Americans tech lords can convince to use the devices.

The pendant with the always-on camera and microphone sounds even more ideal for surveillance than a camera in an eyeglass frame that might have to be turned on and would light up to show you're recording everyone and everything around you.

And if you think the Trump regime won't demand that data...

[FalloutShelter]

1. What could go wrong?

?si=kaBfCFKKPXhDOMfI

[Multichromatic]

2. I hope all these products FAIL!!!!

Why should we help corporations set up an unconstitutional surveillance state?

[Polybius]

6. I have Ray-Ban Meta's that have been out for a couple of years now

Pretty cool. You can listen yo music, make calls, take pics, etc. If you say "Hey Meta, what am I looking at?", it will tell you what it sees in detail.

Not sure why so many hate this tech, but it's most likely a generation thing.

[highplainsdem]

9. Because most people don't want to have to wonder if anyone wearing glasses is taking photos and/or

recording video and/or audio with them, or using them with a facial recognition app to find out who they are and maybe pretend to have met them before. Or try to find out where they live, even before they've given you their name.

They're essentially surveillance devices. What they pick up will be saved by Meta and will become available to the government, if the authorities want it.

People are getting rid of their Ring devices, too.

I wouldn't trust anyone wearing smart glasses.

I saw video on YouTube from someone recording an Oasis concert while wearing smart glasses, and at no point did she tell the people she was talking to that she was recording them from a couple of feet away.

At least if someone is using a smartphone for recording, it's usually pretty obvious.

[Polybius]

10. Ray-Ban Meta's are a lot different than small companies who put out similar glasses

When recording or looking, it omits a bright light, letting anyone know that it is being used. Also, Ray-Ban Meta glasses do not have built-in facial recognition technology that identifies people.

I've have Ring too. Why are people getting rid of it? What's it gonna see, me leaving for work? Maybe getting the mail? Just wear pajamas and it won't be an issue.

[highplainsdem]

12. Meta is planning to add facial recognition to its smart glasses. I guess you missed the news.

https://techcrunch.com/2026/02/13/meta-plans-to-add-facial-recognition-to-its-smart-glasses-report-claims/

And even without it being built in, there are facial recognition apps that anyone wearing smart glasses can use.

People don't like being surveilled and recorded by just anyone they meet, anywhere.

And people who want to record others without them knowing are creeps most people wouldn't want to know.

Editing to add that in the current political climate, no one should trust a stranger wearing smart glasses.

[Polybius]

13. No, we were talking about currently, not speculation on the future

From your link:

Meta’s plans could change, the report notes.

Also, there are no outside apps that are official that you can download, at least without rooting your device.

No comment about the the light that goes off that alerts others that it's recording? I guess you missed it.

[highplainsdem]

14. I don't believe there aren't ways to disable that light, or that it can't simply stop working. And

they've already tested smart glasses recording strangers and discovered people don't notice the light.

No AI user deserves wearable AI at the expense of the privacy of everyone they meet.

They're a violation of other people's rights.

It's against the law in most states to record a phone conversation without letting the person you're talking to know you're recording.

If anyone has a legitimate reason to need smart glasses, they should be made glaringly obvious to everyone around.

[Polybius]

16. There are ways, but it's quite complicated

Meta intentionally built visible safeguards into the design. The recording LED isn’t optional — you cannot simply cover it with your hand or tape and keep recording. If you try to block it, the glasses won’t record. The only theoretical workaround would involve physically damaging the glasses, like drilling into them to remove the LED, which is complicated, risky, and could almost certainly destroy a very expensive product. That’s not something the average person is going to do.

And as for the claim that “people won’t notice the light” — it’s extremely bright and obvious when recording. If someone truly wouldn’t notice that LED, they probably wouldn’t notice someone discreetly taking a photo with a smartphone either. Smartphones are far more common, easy to conceal, and far less regulated in how they signal recording.

This isn’t the first time new camera technology has sparked privacy panic. When camera phones first became mainstream in the early 2000s, many people insisted they were unnecessary and invasive. There were serious arguments from old-timers that such as “no one needs a camera on them at all times” and that only creeps would want that capability. Fast forward over twenty years, and smartphones with cameras are completely normalized. Society adapted, etiquette evolved, and life went on.

As for practical uses, there are plenty — and most are completely ordinary. The glasses are incredibly convenient for hands-free calls and music while walking. The voice assistant features are genuinely useful — being able to say, “Hey Meta, what am I looking at?” and get real-time context is impressive, helpful, and not to mention fun. And sometimes you just need to capture a quick moment without fumbling for your phone — like a deer crossing your path or something happening in real time that would be gone by the time you unlock your screen.

Like any technology, the glasses can be misused — but so can a phone, a laptop, or practically any recording device. The key difference here is that Meta clearly anticipated privacy concerns and built visible, enforceable safeguards directly into the hardware. That’s not negligence — that’s responsible design.

Technology evolves. The question isn’t whether it exists — it’s whether it’s built with thoughtful protections. In this case, it clearly is.

[highplainsdem]

15. Btw, would you trust anyone wearing smart glasses and watching children to be watching innocently,

or would you wonder if they're a pedo trying to record the kids surreptitiously - and since they like AI, maybe using whatever they record for deepfake porn?

Someone wearing smart glasses does not deserve the benefit of the doubt. No one doing surreptitious surveillance does.

Smart glasses should be banned, and people using them should be shunned or banned from places where people don't want to be surveilled/recorded. Think of creeps wearing smart glasses in men's rooms, for instance. Or in dressing rooms used by multiple people.

[Polybius]

17. I would thoroughly vet anyone around my kids

If a relative or close friend that I trusted was watching my kids or nephew and happened to be wearing Meta's, that fine with me. They have their cell phones on them too.

Banned? That's an insane argument to make. This isn't North Korea. Dressing rooms? Sure, that would bother me. But a creep can sneak a cell pic in there too. Or, worse yet, have a dedicated spy device (which are legal to own, btw). Those are just the risks we have to take in a free society. Freedom comes comes with the good and bad.

[highplainsdem]

18. No, we don't have to tolerate people wearing glasses that could be recording and storing photos,

video and audio at any time. Google Glass smart glasses were discontinued because people objected to them. (See the link in reply 11.)

It's legal to own a dedicated spy device, but illegal to put them in bathrooms or changing rooms or other areas where people expect privacy. And creeps taking photos there will get in trouble, too.

Those are just the risks we have to take in a free society. Freedom comes comes with the good and bad.

You want freedom for smart glass users, and everyone else to lose their rights not to be recorded/surveilled.

Neither you nor anyone else deserves that freedom.

They're already having to ban smart glasses for SATs because they can't trust the AI users wearing them not to cheat.

If you think people shouldn't mind being recorded, I suggest you try walking around in public for a while, holding up your smart phone everywhere you face, telling everyone you look at that you're recording them.

You're not likely to find very many people happy about that. Some might try to drive you away, some might call the police, and if you try this in any business you'll probably be asked to leave.

You want the "freedom" to do that surreptitiously with smart glasses.

That's creepy.

[Polybius]

20. Google Glass was discontinued because it was expensive and the technology wasn't there yet in 2013

I think you’re framing this as a zero-sum issue — that giving someone the ability to use smart glasses automatically strips everyone else of their rights. That’s not how this works.

First, in most public spaces in the United States, there is no legal expectation of privacy. That standard already applies to smartphones, dashcams, security cameras, GoPros, and even doorbell cameras. The Ray-Ban Meta Smart Glasses don’t create a new legal reality — they exist within the same one that’s been in place for decades.

Second, the idea that this is about “surreptitious” recording ignores the built-in safeguards. The glasses have a mandatory recording LED that cannot simply be covered to keep filming — the device literally won’t record if you block it. That’s more transparency than most phones provide. With a phone, someone can appear to be texting while recording. With these glasses, there’s a visible signal by design.

On the SAT example — schools banning devices during exams isn’t new or unique to smart glasses. Phones, smartwatches, calculators, even certain headphones have all been restricted in testing environments. That’s not evidence that the technology itself is unethical; it’s just normal policy adapting to new tools. We don’t ban smartphones from society because they’re banned in testing centers.

Your suggestion about walking around openly holding up a phone and announcing you’re recording isn’t really comparable. Social norms matter. If someone walks around aggressively filming people at close range, they’ll make others uncomfortable whether they’re using a phone, a DSLR, or anything else. That’s a behavior issue, not a hardware issue. The same social expectations would apply to someone misusing smart glasses.

The reality is that most people using them are doing very ordinary things — hands-free calls, music, quick photos of things happening in real time, or using AI features for accessibility and convenience. The overwhelming majority of users aren’t trying to secretly surveil strangers.

Every new recording technology has triggered fear at first. Camera phones did. GoPros did. Even early portable camcorders did. Society adjusted, etiquette developed, and life continued.

You may personally find the concept uncomfortable — that’s fair. But discomfort doesn’t automatically equal a loss of rights. The legal framework hasn’t changed. The social norms haven’t collapsed. And the device was intentionally designed with visible safeguards to address exactly the concerns you’re raising.

Calling it “creepy” assumes malicious intent. Most of the time, it’s just another evolution of the camera that’s already been in everyone’s pocket for 20 years.

As for creeps getting in trouble, good. Lock up anyone who takes pics in bathrooms or changing rooms.

This is clearly a generational issue, and we're unlikely to ever see eye to eye on this.

[highplainsdem]

21. The reasons Google Glass was discontinued usually have privacy concerns at or near the top. Tech

prices typically come down quickly. Privacy concerns don't go away.

Second, the idea that this is about “surreptitious” recording ignores the built-in safeguards. The glasses have a mandatory recording LED that cannot simply be covered to keep filming — the device literally won’t record if you block it. That’s more transparency than most phones provide. With a phone, someone can appear to be texting while recording. With these glasses, there’s a visible signal by design.

Sigh. Just google

can smart glasses led light be disabled

and you'll quickly find lots of results on disabling that light, such as this one:

https://www.404media.co/how-to-disable-meta-rayban-led-light/

See the article with video below, which I saw mentioned on social media by people commenting that those being recorded didn't notice the LED light or know what meant.

https://euroweeklynews.com/2025/12/06/ai-glasses-spark-rip-privacy-alarm-in-the-netherlands-a-new-era-of-recognition/

See this Reddit thread

https://www.reddit.com/r/RaybanMeta/comments/1n80c1o/is_the_led_light_super_noticeable/

and the comments in the replies about people being recorded not noticing the LED light at all (especially in bright light, like on a sunny day), and people using these surveillance devices buying stickers to block the LED lights without shutting off the camera, or just drilling out the light while keeping the camera functioning.

Your saying you woudn't record surreptitiously does nothing to assure anyone that others using them won't use them that way.

You're also ignoring the fact that AI companies are data-gathering, using pretty much everything collected for training their AI, and they WILL share that data with authorities including the Trump regime.

So even if you think you're recording just for yourself, you have no way of assuring anyone around you that the Trump regime won't end up with everything your smart glasses capture.

Someone wearing smart glasses and recording at a protest is a threat to everyone at the protest. Someone using a smart phone just to openly record ICE agents is much less likely to end up providing closeup shots of other protesters to federal authorities, or conversations that ICE might think make them a threat to ICE officers who aren't breaking the law, or to Trump. Do you really want to record some angry remark about Trump that could get someone reported to the Secret Service and prosecuted, when they hadn't been serious about what they said and retracted it a second later?

Even if you aren't using facial recognition software, you can't stop others from using that software on what you record.

You're effectively mobile surveillance for the AI bros and government, every time you use smart glasses to record.

And there WILL be creeps using this software to record because they're perverts or hope to record something for blackmail or just to embarrass others.

Your use of AI, all by itself, counts against you being as trustworthy as you would be otherwise, since AI is so often used for fraud of different types, from students cheating, to workers pretending to have done work they had AI do instead, to scams by professional criminals.

Wanting to use AI without others seeing you use a smartphone, and record without an obvious camera including a smartphone camera, does suggest possible deceit even more, and not just convenience for you.

And this could end up making people wearing ordinary glasses appear suspicious at first, which would be really unfair to them.

[Crowman2009]

3. To all those consuming morons willing to buy this junk, I would like to quote Jim Morrison by saying....

....

[muriel_volestrangler]

4. "They were a double pair of Joo Janta 200 Super-Chromatic Peril Sensitive Sunglasses"

"which had been specially designed to help people develop a relaxed attitude to danger. At the first hint of trouble they turn totally black and thus prevent you from seeing anything that might alarm you."

Douglas Adams (The Restaurant at the End of the Universe)

[FemDemERA]

5. LOL... Thank you for my laugh of the day

[Skittles]

7. I have zero doubt that the people who buy these products

all complain about internet tracking being invasive

[Red Mountain]

8. Just........

HELL no!

Society will adjust. Signs on doors, peer pressure, I just don't know what else. For sure, the amount of data even small scale adaptation of devices like these will generate enormous need for storage and processing space......which will mean new power sources and new data centers. Kind of like an AI which came first....the chicken or the egg question.

[highplainsdem]

11. Google's brand of smart glasses, Google Glass, were discontinued soon after they were introduced

in 2014 because of privacy concerns, and a lot of businesses and facilities banned them.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Google_Glass

That was before genAI, and unfortunately we have a lot of AI-addicted people now.

[Crowman2009]

19. Reminds me of this parody.